On 07/18/2014 12:57 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> 
> This particular warning is IMO in a particularly dumb category: GCC
> optimizes some code and then warns about a construct that wasn't there
> in the original code.  In this case, I think it unrolled a loop and
> discovered that one iteration contained a test that was always true.
> Big deal.
> 
> (OTOH, the code in question was buggy, but not all for the reason that
> GCC thought it was.)
> 

                if (syms[sym_vvar_start] > syms[i] + 4096)
                        fail("%s underruns begin_vvar\n",
                             required_syms[i].name);

if i == sym_vvar_start then this is at least a valid warning.  It could
easily be quieted by chaning syms[] to an unsigned array.

        -hpa

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to